To: tfecw
Since when are chemical agents considered a WMD? That's right. The nukes are orders of magnitude more awesomely destructive. It's a different category.
51 posted on
03/03/2005 9:54:20 AM PST by
RightWhale
(Please correct if cosmic balance requires.)
To: RightWhale
whoops that should have been Not considered a WMD. I'll give you a canister of gas isn't a WMD, but bombs and scuds could be considered a WMD. It was an attempt to be sarcastic and point out how the MSM changes the definition every week or so depending on what we come across in Iraq.
If they meant Nuke to be the only WMD then they should just say Nukes, not WMD.
56 posted on
03/03/2005 9:58:09 AM PST by
tfecw
(Vote Democrat, It's easier then working)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson